As far as looking ahead to next year and progress, I believe the only things that have improved from last year are our Defensive Line and special teams. All other positions have either remained the same, or gone down from an 8-8 team the year before:

LB: I don't believe we are better at LB, just looking better because of the improved D'line, which is improvement, but not at a "talent" level at LB.

O'line: Age caught up with us on the donut bros, and even Pace. Possibly we have some solid backups getting some playing time for next year, but we just don't know how this will all shake out. We have potential, but that and a quarter will get you a phone call.

Receivers: We are getting older. We lack speed. No deep threat, and no slot "go-to" guy for 3rd downs. Perhaps Looker, or Hagans, but Linehan doesn't know they exist, so they might as well not. We used to have 6 guys who did not drop the ball. For the first time since 1999, there are dropped balls on crucial plays. Guys like Dante Hall are not the caliber of receiver we are used to. I forgot that most teams had to worry about that.

CB: When teams go to the pass, we get eaten up. Perhaps a hard hitting safety would be the answer more than upgrades at CB. Our safety's are mediocre at best....again.

QB: Bulger may have had his best season last year. Hard to repeat such a good season. I was worried about that. Looking ahead, he seems to take quite a few games into the season to get going. That could be a problem in the future if he continues to be slow out of the gates.

RB: I guess the O'line and Jackson are tied at the hip. Both took a step back this year. I liked stephen davis last year as a backup. What FA RB's out there could have been had without using our 2nd round pick on one? What else could we have got with that pick?

Kicking: Regardless of Wilken's missed FG's, we need a guy who can boot kickoffs into the back of the end zone. We get a new punter every year, and every year I ask "can we check to see if this guy can kick the ball further than wilkens? " Jones is a solid punter.

Coaching: I think the biggest problem with our offensive play calling is that we run plays on first and second down that are not designed to get enough yards for a first down. As a result, we are in 3rd down all too often. We used to try to get the first down on 2nd down so that we didn't have to deal with 3rd and 3, 20 times per game!!

-11-20-2007

moloch41

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

It's not lowering your standards as much as it is lowering your expectations. Scott Linehan is like the slow kid in class- you can't say you're going to lower the standards for every kid in class, but that doesn't mean you can't pat the slow kid on the head if he spells his name right on the paper.

-11-20-2007

laram0

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by renrawtruk

As far as looking ahead to next year and progress, I believe the only things that have improved from last year are our Defensive Line and special teams. All other positions have either remained the same, or gone down from an 8-8 team the year before:

CB: When teams go to the pass, we get eaten up. Perhaps a hard hitting safety would be the answer more than upgrades at CB. Our safety's are mediocre at best....again.

This Sundays game against the Seabags will be a real test for our DB's. The Seahawks have gone pass happy the last few games.

-11-21-2007

MauiRam

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Have I lowered my standards ..? Uh .. maybe .. I can remember during the GSOT years when I would be quite disappointed if we didn't outright blow teams out, let alone lose. Nowadays I am just praying for a win -- at this point ugly wins may be as good as it gets this season.. It still beats losing. I'd rather win ugly than not at all ... We are not a very good team right now, but it is what it is .. To sum things up, I guess what I am trying to say is even when we stink -- I still want to win !!!!

-11-21-2007

Bar-bq

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Well, don't forget this equation:

PBCB - DPR = T

(Pro Bowl Cornerback - Decent Pass Rush = Toast)

Right. Look at the Denver backfield, which boasts Champ Bailey and Dre Bly as starters, who got torched monday- and all season for that matter, because of their pass rush, or more accurately the ability of their defensive line to prompt opposing quarterbacks to take pity sacks. Scary stuff.

-11-21-2007

Nick

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

We could use a true lead blocking FB (remind me again why we cut Hedgecock?).

*cough* Owen Schmitt *cough* :)

As for Hedgecock, this was from Jeff Gordon's post-game chat last weekend...

Quote:

Jeff Gordon: Hedgecock really slipped as a blocker here. The Giants may love him, but there was lots of bad tape on him here. His exit wasn't mourned by many at Rams Park.

How much tape could they have had? He was the lead blocker for a RB who had 1,500 yards last year, and I think he played one regular season game this year.

I think it was more about Linehan getting one of "his guys" (who, by the way, has barely seen the field).

-11-21-2007

Nick

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

How much tape could they have had? He was the lead blocker for a RB who had 1,500 yards last year, and I think he played one regular season game this year.

I think it was more about Linehan getting one of "his guys" (who, by the way, has barely seen the field).

I'm sure Linehan being able to get a guy he was familiar with was part of it, but keep in mind this staff has been trying to improve the FB position from the get-go. They brought in Paul Smith last year to compete with Hedgecock, so obviously there's something they saw in him that they didn't like. Gordon seems to confirm that.

-11-21-2007

HUbison

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

I'm sure Linehan being able to get a guy he was familiar with was part of it, but keep in mind this staff has been trying to improve the FB position from the get-go. They brought in Paul Smith last year to compete with Hedgecock, so obviously there's something they saw in him that they didn't like. Gordon seems to confirm that.

I certainly wouldn't pretend to know more than Linehan's staff, but Coughlin's staff appears to think otherwise. It, at least, begs the question.....what does Coughlin see that Linehan didn't?

-11-21-2007

AvengerRam

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUbison

It, at least, begs the question.....what does Coughlin see that Linehan didn't?

A chance at a playoff spot?

-11-21-2007

moloch41

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUbison

what does Coughlin see that Linehan didn't?

A job next year?

-11-21-2007

Nick

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUbison

what does Coughlin see

He probably saw it as a way to improve their personnel at the position, which wasn't exactly great even before starting FB Jim Finn was lost for the year. The only true fullback on the Giants' roster after that was journeyman Robert Douglas, who was inactive Week One with an injury. After that was a combination of RB Reuben Droughns (who doesn't like playing FB) and undrafted rookie tight end Michael Matthews.

Obviously an experienced starter like Hedgecock becomes intriguing in that situation, whereas for this coaching staff, they were obviously not impressed with him long before this season, as evident by Hedgecock losing his starting job to Paul Smith last year. Gordon's comments on Hedgecock's play here and the reaction to his release lead me to believe it was not solely about Linehan bringing in a guy he coached previously but about improving the position as well.

IMO, the only mistake this coaching staff made in regards to the Hedgecock release was not having someone behind him on the depth chart who could step in and fill that role. If you're going to release someone during the season, you'd better be sure you have a replacement ready to step in. The Rams did not, unless they envisioned Brian Leonard to be that guy until Owens was ready. After all, the coaching staff did say during camp and the preseason that Leonard needed to get snaps at FB after they worked him at RB for a while. Then Jackson's injury meant that Leonard's role shifted a bit.

Still, not an ideal situation at all, but the point was that Gordon's comments yield support to the opinion that this wasn't all about Linehan getting his man.

-11-22-2007

Drew

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

am of the opinion that Coughlin is one of the better HC`s in the NFL,ok not an opinion shared by too many but his teams dont quit on him!

*awaits examples of posters "proving" me wrong*

well anyway.... tho i take the point that Linehan saw something in him that didn`t fit,remind me why the `Phins took Ginn Jnr over Quinn again?

-11-22-2007

Aussie Dave

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

we are just waist deep in ram turd now because of our draft picks during the martz era. like i saw somewhere else on here, the only decent one is hawaii 5-0. and he is no game breaker.

i say for next year we still priority need to add depth on D and also th OL with our picks.
but i want to see a couple big free agents sign to give an immediate impact for next season. rather than waiting. i need us to start opening up a can of whoop ass on those A$$hole seaducks.

-11-22-2007

HUbison

Re: I have not lowered my standards... Have you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

the point was that Gordon's comments yield support to the opinion that this wasn't all about Linehan getting his man.

I understand, Nick. And I'm not trying to make this about Linehan getting "his" guy. But I am curious what it is the Giants see in him (enough to offer a 5-year contract) that the Rams didn't. Maybe he was the only thing on the market for a Giants team that was hurting in the position.......but we weren't exactly filthy with FBs either. And yes, I appreciate Gordon's opinion on the matter, but I don't hold it above Coughlin's.

I guess my underlying question is: is this another example of poor personnel evaluation skills on the part of this organization? Or on the part of the Giants?